Don't elect Donald Trump evangelical panderer-in-chief

Someone recently sent me the article "If You're On the Fence About Your Vote, This Pastor Clarifies How the Very Future of America Is At Stake" by Dr. Jim Garlow in Charisma, in which the author makes an impassioned case for Trump as the lesser of two evils, and asked for my comments. Here they are:

1. The author makes no distinction between moral and economic issues when it comes to a Christian's orientation to politics. I find that problematic. I consider myself conservative in both realms, but not because liberal fiscal policy is evil, but rather because I view it (in many cases) as irresponsible.
2. The author says: "As a pastor, I would rather deal with a church attendee who is blatant and brash in his sinning than one who is devious, lying, cunning and deceptive. Both are problematic, but one is easier to deal with than the other." That may be true, but we shouldn't base our votes for president on who is easier to "correct"; we should base our votes on how they are now.
3. The author further says: "Hillary's 'known' is considerably worse—many times over—than Trump's 'unknown.'" I disagree. Both have knowns and unknowns, but I prefer my favorite political writer Allahpundit's conclusions, namely, that "Trump has a bigger upside and downside than Clinton," or more elaborately: "Hillary's door might be marked 'man-eating tiger' but Trump's door is marked 'beautiful woman or nuclear war.' Which door do you want in those circumstances, where he has an upside that she doesn't but his downside isn't the same but potentially worse?"
4. The author claims that Trump's "misstatements" pale in comparison to Clinton's "scandals." That glosses over the fact that Trump has some serious scandals himself (the Trump University scam, refusing to pay hundreds of contractors and employees, promising millions to various charities and paying them peanuts, etc.) and that many of his so-called "misstatements" are blatant lies, more blatant even than the lies of Hillary "Congenital Liar" Clinton.
5. The author claims that "Trump is right on approximately 75 percent of the issues" whereas "Hillary is wrong on 100 percent of the issues." According to the iSideWith political quiz, my views match with Trump's 61% of the time and Clinton's 49% of the time, but with Evan McMullin's views 81% of the time. Like Garlow, "I wish it was 100 percent." But hey, I'll take what I can get.
6. The author endorses nationalism over globalism and considers it a serious issue. I suppose if you share this view, it makes sense to endorse Trump. I don't share it, though I'm sympathetic to some anti-globalist impulses. I happen to believe that when, in a rare show of solidarity, virtually all economists agree that free trade is good, we should pay attention. While I believe borders should be protected and immigration regulated, I don't believe that immigration (illegal or otherwise) is the nation's scourge. I believe that we have a responsibility to our neighbors (at home and abroad) and that various NGOs are doing great work (often assisted by governments, including our own) to fight hunger, poverty, and diseases. I think Trumpism's obsession with globalism is an extreme overreaction to the real problems we face.
7. The author says that "Trump has moved pro-life." "Moved" is one way to put it: he was "very pro-choice" before and during his 2000 Reform Party presidential run, even being in favor of access to partial-birth abortions, only pronounced himself "pro-life" when he first ran for president as a Republican in 2011, and has such flimsy understanding of pro-life issues that he took five different stances on the issue in three days this year. If you don't think he's merely pandering, then I have fetal tissue a bridge to sell you.
8. The author says, "Hillary claims 'everything is fine' in America. This defies every single fact, but facts have never been an interest of Hillary's." Compare this to many conservatives' reactions to Michelle Obama saying in 2008, "For the first time in my adult life, I'm proud of my country," or the NFL national anthem protests. To many Americans, it would seem that the only determinant of whether America is "great" is whether or not figureheads of the opposite party currently claim that it is.
9. "Trump will address the massive government spending" and "stop the massive overreach of government." Trump is a big-government authoritarian. Maybe he'll make government leaner in some areas by ruling by fiat instead of by bureaucracy, but I won't hold my breath for any balanced budgets or entitlement reform or anything else approaching fiscal conservatism.
10. "Trump will expose—and I pray, bring down—'the systemic evil' (crony, deceitful, misuse of capitalism) that reigns among many high-dollar lobbyists." If you say so, Dr. Garlow, it must be so!
11. "Trump fully grasps the loss of religious liberty. I have heard him speak on it in person on several occasions." I have a feeling the author was reading a lot more into Trump's statements than he was actually saying, but even if that's not the case, I doubt Trump actually backed up his teleprompter words with real conviction. His comments on his own personal faith are so nakedly about "checking the box" and nothing more (consider that he said he doesn't ask God for forgiveness because he just tries to be better, he called Communion "my little wine and my little cracker," and his favorite verse is "an eye for an eye"), that I'd be shocked if he had anything substantial or (even arguably) sincere to say about religious liberty. Moreover, on the issues that are front-and-center "culture war" issues to most evangelicals this year, Trump has been either solidly leftist or tepidly rightist (depending on the day). On transgender bathrooms, he first supported Obama's position, then decided he didn't care, then flip-flopped; on gay marriage, he's usually silent, but sometimes breaks the silence to signal his acceptance of homosexuality. Two spot-on satirical articles from the Babylon Bee sum it all up perfectly.
12. The Supreme Court, another issue Garlow hypes up, is the one area that has tempted me to turn to Trumpism at times. He released a specific list of justices he might nominate earlier this year, and they were all solid. However, 1) he released another list more recently, and while there were no obvious problems with any of them (that I'm aware of), the list was very obviously not crafted for anything other than getting Ted Cruz's endorsement, and he will almost certainly not follow through on it, and 2) more generally, Trump's not exactly known for keeping his promises. 3) I was more comfortable exhorting conservative fence-sitters to vote McCain or Romney because of the justices issue, but there's a fundamental difference between those two and this one: they're actually sane. 4) Instead of using the Supreme Court as a wedge issue, we should try to reduce its effect as such by pushing for things like Supreme Court term limits (18 years), as Ted Cruz, Rick Perry, and others have.
13. "I make no excuse for wrongdoing or wrongful, hurtful words from either candidate. Candidly, I want King Jesus. He rules in my heart. And yours too, I suspect. And I want Him to rule here—now. But that day is not fully manifested—yet. In the meantime, we prayerfully, carefully navigate this challenging election season, with great concern that above all, we honor our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in every arena of our lives, including the voting booth. That is my hope. I believe it is yours as well." Amen to all that!